“So, Can You Revit?” Historic Preservation Design Education and ...

Volume Two, 2009

PreservationEducation & Research

4095-6491 NSSI

Offprint From

Copyright © 2009 Preservation Education & Research. All rights reserved. Articles and reviews appearing in this journal may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, except for class-room and noncommercial use, including illustrations, in any form (beyond that copying permitted by sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law), without written permission from the National Council for Preservation Education (NCPE).

Preservation Education & Research Volume Two, 2009 91

Meiji Restorations: Defining Preservation, Education, and Architecture for Modern Japan

Japan’s modern age began with the Meiji period (1868-

1912), an era of government-sponsored Westernization

in art, education, and architecture. In this climate,

government policy barely concerned itself with

traditional Japanese architecture. However, historical

buildings soon attracted attention from disparate figures,

including priests, government officials, educators,

art reformers, architects, and master builders. Some

groups drew on pre-Meiji precedents to argue for

government support, citing the historical state funding

of religious institutions. Others, such as the artist and

critic Okakura Kakuzô, used modern concepts of art

and history to argue for the relevance of historical art.

The architect Itô Chûta, learning from both Okakura

and the master builder Kigo Kiyoyoshi, used historical

Japanese architecture to place Japan in the context

of world architecture. Preservation concepts became

fundamental in the development of architecture and

the fine arts for modern Japan. Preservation matured

at the intersection of these diverse approaches and, in

turn, served as a forum for officials, critics, architects,

engineers, and builders to conceptualize architecture

for modern Japan. The 1897 Ancient Shrines and

Temples Preservation Law incorporated these debates

and codified architectural preservation as a modern

national practice.

DON CHOI

California Polytechnic State University

San Luis Obispo, California

“So, Can You Revit?” Historic Preservation Design Education and Digital Media

The impact of computer graphics and digital media on

architectural design cannot be overstated. In the last

fifteen years, design and construction in architecture

and engineering have completely changed due to

significant advances in technology. Today’s students

no longer use pencils, templates, vellum, or even the

antiquated AutoCAD. Rather, they practice integrated

design and Building Information Modeling (BIM),

an emerging design methodology that is radically

changing architectural practice. It will also change

architectural education, creating the need to integrate

construction technology and design. This is truly

the case when historic preservation is integrated

into architectural design education, where accurate

documentation and depiction of existing historic

resources is essential. As students race to implement

new design ideas within a historic resource—whether

it is an adaptive use project, rehabilitation, or

restoration—do they and can they understand how the

resource is constructed? Is there an understanding of

what is “real” and what is virtual? Teaching historic

preservation using integrated design and BIM creates

both challenges and opportunities in the design

studio.

PAUL HARDIN KAPP

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Champaign, Illinois

Abstracts

Gali

Rectangle


“So, Can You Revit?” Historic Preservation Design Education and Digital Media

PAUL HARDIN KAPP

Every spring at architectural schools, career fairs

or “expos” draw architectural firms from across

the country to set up booths to distribute literature

and employment applications. Students, professionally

dressed and with portfolio in hand, seek the promise of

a job after a graduation. Employers ask students about

their knowledge of building and architecture; they may

even be interested in learning about ideas students are

developing in their theses. But, according to graduate

students in architecture, it appears that they are looking

for graduates who are proficient in the latest digital

media and can produce renderings using the latest

technology in Building Information Modeling or BIM. It

is during this professional courtship that the inevitable

question is asked: “So, can you Revit?” “Yes, I do,”

replies the twenty-first century architectural student.

The December 2008 McGraw Hill Construction

Smart Market Report, entitled Building Information

Modeling, notes that 43 percent of American Institute

of Architects (AIA) member architectural firms now

use BIM software. Revit, a three-dimensional building

design software platform made by Autodesk, is

one of many digital media being used for BIM. It is

anticipated that BIM use in the architecture profession

will increase dramatically; experts in BIM predict that

by the end of 2009, 54 percent of AIA member firms will

be using it to design buildings. BIM has been widely

accepted by the architectural profession, and the AIA

is promoting it outright. As noted BIM expert Harvey

Bernstein states: “Your career and the prosperity of

your company depend on becoming familiar with

the tools, processes and value propositions of BIM”

(Young, Jones, and Bernstein 2008). During this period

of change, architectural firms face an immediate and

difficult choice: outsource BIM work or hire staff familiar

with the new technology. Today’s architecture students

who have grown up with computer technology, have

embraced digital design media and are now ready to

help the design profession implement BIM. But the

question remains: Do they have the basic architectural

education foundation needed to design buildings that

will actually be built?

BIM is not just a new computer-generated graphic

tool; it is the database facet of an entirely new way

of designing and building called integrated practice.

Integrated practice is the construction industry’s

response to the marketplace mandate for buildings

that can be completed faster, cost less to design

and construct, and are more sustainable. Integrated

practice is collaborative; it relies on a free exchange of

information among all parties involved in the building

process. This includes not only design professionals

and contractors but also cost estimators and vendors,

code officials, and outside reviewers (e.g., review

architects in a SHPO). But BIM does not stop at the

completion of the project; it can be used to manage

the building after occupancy. Today, more and more

facilities managers are benefitting from BIM. They

envision facilitating building lifecycle management,

even from remote locations. BIM has the potiental to

transform the construction industry, and it is beginning

to be embraced as a teaching tool in academic

architectural design studios (Reams 2009).

In most architectural schools, basic computer

graphics such as AutoCAD are introduced early

in undergraduate studios and laboratories. Since

graphics is rarely the focus of advanced architectural

design studios, today’s computer-savvy students learn

the latest computer graphics, such as Revit, either in

other classes, in studios, or outside the classroom.

16 Preservation Education & Research Volume Two, 2009

Students are attracted to Revit as the preferred product

for BIM for its dimensional graphic abilities, as well as

for its accessibility in schools.

BIM is much more than the latest computer

drafting package; it is the departure point into a

completely new realm of architectural design, practice,

and documentation. The basic concept of BIM is to

develop a “virtual building model” that will guide its

own building process; as the physical building is

assembled, changes in the field are documented in

the virtual model. As the actual building is completed,

the virtual building is used to document operations and

maintenance (paper documentation may even vanish).

Distinct phases of design will be merged, and the

process of both design and construction will become

fluid, blurring the traditional distinction between

architect and contractor.

Design professions have struggled to adopt and

implement BIM; only recently has the AIA addressed

this new trend in a series of papers to its board and

membership (Walbridge 2007). Although the premise

of BIM was conceptualized by Charles Eastman at

Georgia Tech in the 1970s, the term was coined by

software vendor Autodesk in 2002. Like Computer

Aided Design (CAD1), developed in the 1970s, BIM’s

development stems from mass manufacturing, not

from architecture. Its strength lies in its immediate

integration of design and fabrication and its abilty to

describe architectural design in three dimensions. Its

3-D capabilities made it attractive early in the 1990s

to abstract Modernist architects such as Frank Gehry,

who relied on BIM to piece together his audacious

designs, such as the Guggenhiem Museum in Bilbao,

Spain, and the Experience Music Project in Seattle,

Washington. Initially, Gehry and his firm used a BIM

software developed in France called CATIA. After

several years of adapting and revising the software

in their office, Gehry Partners started their own BIM

software company, Gehry Technologies--which is now

a leader in BIM technology. Gehry is considered a

leading practitioner and innovator in BIM; he believes

that BIM’s greatest attribute is its abilty to accelerate the

design and construction process through immediate

design and construction integration and its ability to

facilitiate collaboration (Hill 2006). Designers are linked

to the BIM design and to a wide range of diverse “design

team” members, such as cost estimators, marketing

professionals, product vendors, and others. This allows

manufacturing to remain flexible; efficiency is improved

with the merging roles of designer and fabricator. But

in the construction professions, the blurred divisions

of services for building delivery become problematic.

Who is truly responsible for the design, and who is

responsible for execution and construction? Where

do vendors fit into the design building process?

Finally, whose design is it when everyone has a role

in the process? Are students in traditional architectural

schools being taught to be team members for this bold

new world?

The possibilities of BIM are limited only by the

power of designers’ imaginations and the limitations

of computer software; designers are not restrained

by the normal conventions of graphic depiction (plan,

section, elevation) in architecture. Instead, they have

the ability to build and manipulate a three-dimensional

model in the actual specifications of the building

(albeit on the computer screen) and can import details

from vendors. Designers can link their models to the

International Building Code. Code analysis can occur

instantaneously, while heating and cooling loads are

readily calculated. Engineers can work simultaneously

with architects to design a building, while estimators

can readily determine if the design is financially feasible.

Another benefit? This can all be done remotely.

So, how can BIM work within the context of a historic

resource? After all, historic resources are existing

buildings; they were not developed in a virtual world, and

their conditions and parameters are real. Moreover, no

two historic resources are exactly the same. The passage

of time allows buildings to evolve; unfortunately, changes

in time are not documented graphically until a design

project makes it necessary to do so. What are typically

preserved are often unique architectural components

that were crafted exclusively for the historic building or

artifact. How are these buildings documented within

the framework of BIM? This question is fundamental

for those of us who teach historic preservation and

architectural design. There is an urgent need to better

integrate historic building technology, materiality, and

construction practice in the design studio using BIM.

KAPP P. H.


riseoFthemaChines

Those who studied architecture and designed by hand

on drafting tables can easily become Luddites in the

face of the new generation of architects and the powerful

digital tools that allow them to produce an astonishing

amount of work. Most historic preservationists are

attracted to historic buildings because of their love of

handmade craft. Students of the last century enjoyed

the art of drafting and were enamored of architects of an

earlier time who eloquently depicted designs on linen

sheets using ink pens. Old copies of trade magazines

such as Pencil Points were references. Although some

architecture schools, such as Notre Dame, have made

these traditional graphic depictions a primary aspect

of their program, it is unrealistic to believe that today’s

design professional can avoid digital technology.

As a whole, the academy has been slow in

implementing digital design in the architectural studio.

Initially, this delay was due to the high cost of computer

technology for cash-strapped schools. Twenty years

ago, it was generally expected that universities could

provide computer laboratory space for students through

student fees and tuition. Computers in the architecture

studio were bulky, and CAD software was expensive,

slow, and prone to crashing (University of Illinois at

Urbana-Champaign 2002). However, the advent of the

laptop and the rapid development of graphic software

have changed everything. Now it is commonplace for

students to create their designs on their own laptop

computers while in studio. In addition, wireless internet

allows students immediate access to information,

including technical data that had previously required

hours of research in the library. Finally, architecture

schools no longer look at computer labs as overhead.

Instead, computer printing laboratories have become

lucrative business ventures supported by user fees.

bimanDthehistoriCPreservationDesign

stuDio

In a historic preservation studio at the School

of Architecture at the University of Illinois at

Urbana-Champaign during the 2008 fall semester,

students explored the application of BIM in historic

preservation design. The studio comprised fourteen

first-year graduate students, all of whom had

undergraduate degrees in architecture and were

pursuing a Master of Architecture degree. Half of

the students had declared historic preservation as

their study option, and all of them had a working

knowledge of BIM, using Revit as a computer

platform. The design assignment was two-pronged:

the expansion of the Carolina Inn and the adaptive

use and rehabilitation of Whitehead Residence

Hall, both on the campus of the University of North

Carolina at Chapel Hill.

The Carolina Inn is a historic luxury hotel (Figs. 1,

2) that serves the University and the Town of Chapel

Hill; Whitehead Residence Hall (Fig. 3) is a dormitory

located directly to the south of the inn. These

two buildings are listed on the National Register

of Historic Places, both share common stylistic

traits (early twentieth-century Collegiate Colonial

Revival), and both are contributing resources to a

national and local historic district in Chapel Hill. The

challenge was to make Whitehead Hall part of the

hotel complex. Students were asked to reprogram

Whitehead for luxury suites and new hotel rooms and

to add new services to the inn, such as a swimming

pool and a new dining facility. Finally, students

were asked to address a significant grade change

between the two buildings, involving infrastructure

and the preservation of sizeable trees. A main

aspect of the problem was to understand and use

“as-built” (building documentation based solely on

the construction of the design of a building) and “as

designed” (construction drawings and specifications

used for bidding and construction that do not

document any changes made in the field) (Figs. 4,

5).2 Students had full access to original construction

documents and all site, infrastructure, and UNC

Facilities Services documentation.

Students chose Revit, one of the more popular

BIM software,3 to develop virtual models of the

Carolina Inn and Whitehead Hall. Because they

were unable to make onsite measurements, the

model developed in Revit was based solely on the

documentation they were able to obtain. Students

KAPP P. H.


analyzed the architectural and historical significance

of the two buildings and the overall context of the site

within the historic district; they developed a program,

a zoning analysis, and a building-code analysis. The

most frustrating aspect of the assignment was the

time consumed in accurately depicting the Carolina

Inn and Whitehead Hall in detail. The students were

quite skillful in using the graphics provided by Revit.

But they quickly learned that Revit requires its users

to accurately design every feature of a building at

a bid and construction-ready level. In a white paper

written for Autodesk, Professor Lachmi Khemlani of

the University of California at Berkley explains how

Revit software and BIM differ from both traditional

design practices and three-dimensional computer

graphic applications:

KAPP P. H.

Fig. 3. The front façade of Whitehead Hall, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, May 15, 2009 (Photograph by Dan Sears).

Fig. 1. The front façade of the Carolina Inn, May 15, 2009 (Photograph by Dan Sears).

Fig. 2. The motorcourt of the Carolina Inn, May 15, 2009 (Photograph by Dan Sears).


Revit requires more communication and more

collaboration than working with AutoCAD, which

some people resist. Revit is a ‘designer’s tool,’ it

is more tactile and requires as well as facilitates

a complete understanding of the project both

at the micro and the macro levels. In current

practice, several people working at only the

micro levels feel threatened by the application’s

demand for a broader understanding of the

project. Revit also is anathema to those who

are not used to rigor in design. With Revit, you

cannot cheat or fake the form of a design, and

you cannot get away with missing information.

All parts of the building are required to co-relate

with each other. Folks who use traditional 3D

modeling applications often create images that

don’t coordinate with the project at all, and such

folks end up resisting the rigor and honesty that

Revit imposes (Khemlani 2004, 9).

Students learned that missing information had to be

confronted in order for the model to work. What could not

be learned from the existing documentation would have

to be verified in the field, which was impossible since

the project was near the East Coast. Students requested

information from the owner (UNC), the town planning and

inspections departments, and from the UNC archives,

architects, and engineers who had previously worked on

either the Carolina Inn or Whitehead Hall. What could

not be gathered through research would have to be

determined by an understanding of basic construction

technology and materials use. This immediately exposed

their true lack of understanding of how historic buildings

are built and raised the issue of how in-depth the design

problem should actually be.

As noted by Dr. Khemlani, the need for collaboration

with other design team members was realized using

BIM in the historic preservation design studio. Students

were required to thoroughly study and understand the

documentation, then use it to build a virtual model

in Revit. In order to facilitate the process, several

students built the virtual model while others built site

models. The need for model calibration challenged the

students to work in design teams. This opportunity for

collaboration is one of the most appealing aspects of

BIM; however, team building remains counterintuitive

in most design schools, which traditionally promote

individual creativity and competition. This is especially

true with first-year graduate architecture students.

The lack of material accurately describing the

Carolina Inn might not have been so problematic if the

project were handled at the traditional schematic design

KAPP P. H.

Fig. 4. First-floor plan of the Carolina Inn (as designed), 1924, Arthur Nash, Architect (UNC Facilities Planning and Construction Plan Room).

Fig. 5. Partial elevation drawing of the Carolina Inn (as designed), 1924, Arthur Nash, Architect (UNC Facilities Planning and Construction Plan Room).


KAPP P. H.

Fig. 6. Partial elevation digital drawing of the Carolina Inn addition, December 5, 2008 (Meghan Roller, Master of Architecture candidate, University of Illinois School of Architecture).

Fig. 7. Rendering of the proposed Carolina Inn addition, December 5, 2008 (Meghan Roller, University of Illinois School of Architecture).


KAPP P. H.

level but, by using BIM, the level of design immediately

jumped to the level of construction documentation. The

issues of design level and model calibration imposed

impossible demands on first-year graduate students.

With BIM, calibration becomes the primary challenge

for a successful design both in the academic studio

and the professional office. It requires that the BIM

operator understand building technology. Calibration

also takes time and access to the existing building

(Cavallero 2006, 33).

During this project, two key opportunities were

missed by both students and faculty: the ability

to collaborate with others beyond the walls of the

architecture school and the ability to present and

critique solely in BIM. The students could have easily

engaged in online presentations with offsite experts.

Furthermore, by requiring students to present only

paper drawings of their design in plans, sections,

elevations, three dimensional-drawings, and models,

the faculty missed an opportunity to learn how BIM

can be taught.

Dr. Khemlani’s assertion of the honesty found in

Revit is somewhat misleading. Since Revit relies on

a library of building assembly details and graphic

representations of materials imbedded in the software,

the “honesty” she refers to is based only in the reality

that is found in Revit and not necessarily in the actual

artifact. This became problematic in documenting

the two historic buildings. For example, brick wall

surfaces in Revit were based on standard brick

sizes and American running bond patterns; both the

Carolina Inn and Whitehead Hall are built of oversized

brick in an English bond pattern. Moldings typically

found on early twentieth-century Colonial Revival

buildings were also not found in the Revit library and

could not be readily “pasted” into the model. Difficult

intersections and corner junctures typically found in

buildings with traditional moldings were non-existent

in the Revit software, which was conceived to design

modern buildings. In order to accurately depict the

existing conditions of the two buildings in Revit,

students had to research how traditional materials

were assembled, draw them orthographically in

AutoCAD, and import them into their virtual model.

Students also used technical reference books of the

period to gain an understanding of the way these

buildings were constructed (Fig. 6).

The use of Revit for a historic building using “as

designed” and “as built” documentation changed

the objective of the design problem; what originally

was intended to be an eight-week design of additions

and adaptive use had changed into a problem of

construction and materiality. Students were confronted

with how the role of structures, materials, and systems

impacted initial design decisions (Figs. 7, 8). Dr.

Khemlani acknowledges the problem of too many

design variables at the outset of the design process in

professional practice:

Fig. 8. Section of the proposed addition to the Carolina Inn, December 5, 2008 (Meghan Roller, University of Illinois School of Architecture).


Hand in hand with the ability of Revit to not

fake—a plus during the detailed design and

subsequent phases—also comes the inability

for abstraction, which all firms in the research

study found to be a negative during schematic

design. As discussed in the last section, Revit

requires complete modeling 100% of the time.

This requirement does not match the needs

of most architectural design processes at the

preliminary design stage. It does not support the

design flow, and is too restrictive and thereby

off-putting to those who actually conceptualize

the designs. This made several firms question

whether Revit should be used by a design

principal at all, given that it is not particularly

`sketchy’ (Khemlani 2004, 9).

revitCity

Clearly, the internet is no longer just a user-friendly

system of corporate and informational websites; it

is consumer-driven, with users “building” their own

cars, chatting live with other users, or creating their

own blogs and web pages. It is not surprising that

Revit has its own blog—Revit City. Interestingly,

it was not created by Autodesk but rather by a

communications company called Pierce Media

in 2003. Pierce Media intended the blog to be a

community website allowing Revit users around the

world to share their ideas. At Revit City, Revit users

display their three-dimensional work, add and use

an ever-expanding library of building details, discuss

the future of Revit in architectural design, and share

“snazzy workarounds.”

Today’s architecture students gravitate to Revit

City. It is a reflection of their generation, it supports

the competitive nature of architecture students by

giving them a perceived edge over their peers, and it

allows them to impress design faculty and perspective

employers. What is surprising – and to some

disappointing—is the lack of discussion regarding

actual design and construction. For example, Revit

bloggers discuss the graphic representation of a virtual

storefront rather than how it is assembled in the field.

Part of this can be attributed to the fact that students

are not building in the field; they are designing in the

academic studio. Also, users who are professionals

simply need instruction on the latest architectural

software rather than advice on building. Furthermore,

the purpose of this software program is just that; it is

a computer design tool, not a building aid. Real world

applications have no place here.

However, the phenomenon of Revit City cannot be

overstated. Similar to Wikipedia, Revit City demonstrates

the fluidity of ideas found on the internet. Unfortunately,

not all information is factual or reliable. Rather than

consulting the numerous online technical briefs from

accredited organizations, such as the Brick Institute

of America (BIA), Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning

Contractors National Association Inc. (SMACNA),

and even the Secretary of Interior’s Standards and

Preservation Briefs, students often rely on Revit and

Revit City exclusively for design guidance. Apparently,

the attractiveness of graphics trumps the need for

technical understanding, especially when building a

historic building. An emphasis on researching historic

construction to make informed decisions should be

brought back into the academic design studio. Only a

grounded and integrated foundation of understanding

in construction and historic building technology can

address the problems that have been exposed while

using Rivet (Figs. 9, 10).

Another negative aspect of Revit (and other BIM

products) is, as mentioned, the lack of historic resource

graphics. When students could not find Colonial

Revival moldings or English bond brick patterns,

they simply created their own. Actually, not so simply.

Creating a virtual historic detail in Revit is laborious,

even more so than in other design software. If Revit is

to be used successfully in the academic studio, then

design problems need to be tailored for use with BIM

programs such as Revit.

It is interesting to note that at this moment in the

BIM revolution there is a generational divide in the

acceptance and use of digital media as a design

methodology. Design professionals are resistant

to change and are not comfortable discarding the

traditional track of project delivery: schematic design,

design development, construction documentation,

KAPP P. H.


bidding and construction—even though all of the

professional design associations are embracing this

new technology.4 Other design professionals (especially

the new generation) embrace this technology and are

motivated to produce impressive graphics. While the

next generation of architects may be able to say, “Yes,

I can Revit,” will they be able to say the same for the

more important question, “Do you understand how

to design? How to build?” And, more importantly,“Do

you understand the fundamental ideas of historic

preservation?”

theFuture

At what point should all facets of building technology—

historic building construction, structural integration,

environmental system integration, and Building

Information Modeling (BIM)—be integrated into the

design curriculum? Early and succinctly in the education

of an architect. The market demands it. As the design

and construction industries continue to transform into

the new fluid model called integrated practice (using

BIM), today’s architecture and historic preservation

KAPP P. H.

Fig. 9. View from the balcony of the proposed addition to the Carolina Inn, December 5, 2008 (Meghan Roller, University of Illinois School of Architecture).

Fig. 10. Partial axonometric section of the proposed addition to the Carolina Inn, December 5, 2008 (Meghan Roller, University of Illinois School of Architecture).


students will be thrust into the forefront of the revolution.

But the market is not just demanding “BIM operators”; it

is demanding competent designers on the cusp of being

licensed professionals in architecture or engineering.

Never has a design tool demanded so much knowledge

from its users. In order to truly master BIM, one must

have a sound understanding of all facets of materials,

construction practices, and the mechanical, electrical,

and plumbing systems found in buildings. The ability to

make such an immediate leap from sketch to building

changes the entire dynamic of the architectural design

process from a question-driven method to an answer-

driven one (Cheng 2006) This paradigm shift in thinking

runs against the way architecture has always been

taught— as a process of discovery—in the academy.

The challenge of using BIM in a historic preservation

design studio is even more problematic. Calibration

between the existing building and the computer model

immediately becomes an important issue. Students will

need to adjust their expectations of finding all they need

either in software-provided detail libraries or by visiting

sites such as Revit City; they will have to continue the “old”

practice of searching for archival documents, drawings,

and images. Instructors in historic preservation will have

to challenge their students to see past the impressive,

often misleading graphics. The objective is not to teach

a new graphic design tool (which will surely change) but

to teach critical thinking in both architectural design and

historic preservation, never substituting “why” with “how

to” (Cheng 2006).

Physical historic resources should not be forgotten

when designing in a “virtual” world. In a July 1972 article

in the National Trust’s monthly newspaper, Preservation

News, Bob Stipe stated it best:

First we seek to preserve our heritage because

our historic resources are all that physically link us

to our past. Some portion of that patrimony must

be preserved if we are to recognize who we are,

how we became so, and, most importantly, how

we differ from others of our species. Archives,

photographs and books are not sufficient to

impart the warmth and life of a physical heritage.

The shadow simply does not capture the essence

of the object (Stipe 2003, 13).

One should add “computer-produced virtual

model” to Stipe’s list. The relationship of physical

object and designer is vital to successful design in

historic preservation, whether it is a rehabilitation,

restoration, or an adaptive use project.

As technology accelerates the design process,

it should not accelerate our methods for teaching

preservation. Although it can be argued that the

concept of integrated practice is both real and

attainable, one cannot make the same conclusion

about an integrated practice curriculum, which, at

this point, has proven to be unrealistically demanding

on students (Cheng 2006). Preservation instructors

should continue to emphasize how historic buildings

work and help students develop the analytical skills

needed to preserve them. Important issues of design

and preservation, such as architectural integrity,

should not be jettisoned to allow students time to

develop impressive graphics of designs that they may

not even understand.

One must also not lose sight that BIM/Integrated

Practice will provide numerous professional

opportunities for future generations of preservationists.

As a tool for design collaboration, BIM allows

preservationists to access the design process early

and often; this can provide great benefits in preserving

the integrity of historic resources in the design

and construction process. As a product of a global

economy, BIM/Integrated Practice allows both the

student and the professional to collaborate more, not

only outside the studio walls but with other students

and professionals across the planet.

The possibilities of an integrated practice and

opportunities for collaboration are more difficult to

simulate in the academic studio. The ability to accelerate

the design process, the primary pitch for using BIM by

its proponents, may not be such an attractive attribute

for teaching students design and preservation. “Real

world” situations using BIM may not be the best way to

use this design tool when teaching design with historic

resources. This may especially be the case as students

learn the importance of building documentation in

the preservation process. Calibration between what

is real and what is virtual will continue to become an

important aspect of teaching historic preservation

KAPP P. H.


using BIM. Unlike new building design in which a

relationship exists between virtual model/design and

the construction/physical manifestation of the building,

historic preservation design adds an entirely new level

to the design process—that of existing conditions; the

chain of calibration in preservation should be: existing

building, virtual model, and construction. The need for

rigorous building investigation and verification, which

is often time consuming, is extremely important. BIM

does not provide shortcuts in the process; it simply

states the deficiency of information.

BIM requires a high level of expertise in designing

with historic resources. Only through fundamental

learning, understanding the potential of BIM in historic

preservation projects, and years of experience can

that expertise be attained (the latter conclusion applies

to any media in design). In using BIM as tool in the

academic studio, one must respect its capabilities but

also be mindful of its limitations; BIM is answer-driven

not question-driven. Helping students develop their

analytical skills and judgment in historic preservation

lies at the core of historic preservation education. BIM

should be used only as an analytical tool, alongside

sketching, drafting, and hand measuring, enabling the

architecture student to understand the process rather

than allowing “the machine” to do the work.

PAUL HARDIN KAPP

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Champaign, Illinois

Paul Hardin Kapp is an associate professor of architecture and

director of the historic preservation option at the University of

Illinois at Urbana-Champaign School of Architecture. He previously

served as the Campus Historic Preservation Manager and Historical

Architect at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where

he designed or managed more than a dozen historic rehabilitations

of campus landmark buildings. He was also a lecturer in historic

preservation and American vernacular architecture in the UNC

Department of City and Regional Planning. At Carolina, Mr. Kapp

managed over $150 million of capital-construction funds. Kapp’s

work was recognized by Preservation North Carolina and won

awards from the Preservation Society of Chapel Hill. In 2007, he

received a Getty Campus Historic Preservation Grant to develop

a historic preservation landscape master plan for the Carolina

campus. Prior to coming to Carolina, Mr. Kapp had a successful

private practice in rural Virginia. Several of his historic rehabilitations

earned preservation awards from the Preservation Alliance of

Virginia and the Association of General Contractors of Tennessee.

Mr. Kapp is a registered architect (Virginia, West Virginia, North

Carolina, NCARB) and a LEED Accredited Professional, with more

than twenty years of experience in historic preservation.

enDnotes

Computer Aided Design products include Autodesk, ArchiCad, and Bentley Systems. Students had access to “as designed” drawings and specifications of the original 1924 Carolina Inn by Arthur Nash, Architect; the 1971 addition to the inn by Archie Royal Davis; and the 1991 addition to Inn by Glave, Newman and Anderson Architects. Students also had access to “as built” documentation compiled by the UNC Engineering Information Office. Several companies produce BIM software, such as Rhinoceros, Bentley, Graphisoft, and ArchiCad.In an article entitled “The Bim Revolution,“ architect H. Michael Hill (2006) writes “CAD drawings are very useful, and they clearly have contributed a great deal in terms of efficiency, process, and scope. Yet when you get right down to it, they represent little more than electronic applications of the age-old pencil-and-paper system that architects, specifiers, engineers, and others have been using for centuries.” He supports noted architect Frank Gehry, who makes the assertion that BIM provides the opportunity for collaboration and that it also introduces the fourth dimension—time—to the design process.

reFerenCes

Cheng, Renee. 2006. “Questioning the Role of BIM in Architectural Education.” AECbytes Viewpoint 26 (July 2006). Retrieved May 15, 2009, from http://www.aecbytes.com/viewpoint/2006/issue_26.html.

Cavellero, Alberto. 2006. “BIM Collaboration: Integrating A/E/C Implementation for Building Information Modeling.” Construction Specifier (December 2006). Retrieved June 7, 2009, from http://www.csinet.org/s_csi/docs/16100/16008.pdf.

Hill, H. Michael. 2006. The BIM Revolution. GoStructural.com. Retrieved April 23, 2009, from http://www.gostructural.com/article.asp?id=866.

Khemlani, Lachmi. 2004. “Autodesk Revit: Implementation in Practice. White Paper.” Retrieved January 26, 2009, from http://faculty.arch.utah.edu/bim/Website%20Info/Articles/BIM%20articles/BIM%20implementation%20case%20studies/Revit_Implementation_WP.pdf.

1.

2.

3.

4.

KAPP P. H.


Pressman, Andrew. 2007. “Integrated Practice in Perspective: A New Model for the Architectural Profession.” Architectural Record (May 2007). Retrieved May 16, 2009, from http://archrecord.construction.com/practice/projDelivery/0705proj-1.asp.

Reams, Lucas. 2009. “Nuturing BIM: Evolving Architectural Education.” Journal of Building Information Modeling (Spring 2009). Retrieved June 5, 2009, from http://www.wbdg.org/references/jbim.php.

Stipe, Robert E., ed. 2003. A Richer Heritage: Historic Preservation in the Twenty-First Century. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign School of Architecture. 2002. “Architecture Program Report: School of Architecture, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.” Presented to the National Architectural Accreditation Board, September 2002. Retrieved January 21, 2009, from http://www.arch.uiuc.edu/about/accreditation/documents/APR2003.pdf.

Walbridge, James A. 2007. “BIM in the Architect-Led Design-Build Studio.” American Institute of Architects. Retrieved January 26, 2009, from http://www.aia.org/akr/Resources/Documents/AIAP037644?dvid=&recspec=AIAP037644.

Young, Robert W., Stephen Jones, and Harvey Bernstein, comps. 2008. Building Information Modeling (BIM): Transforming Design and Construction to Achieve Greater Industry Productivity. Smart Market Report by McGraw Hill Construction. Retrieved April 17, 2009, from http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/aia/documents/pdf/aias077483.pdf.

KAPP P. H.

For subscription to

Preservation Education & Research please visit NCPE’s website:

http://www.ncpe.us

“So, Can You Revit?” Historic Preservation Design Education and ...

Documents

Transcript of “So, Can You Revit?” Historic Preservation Design Education and ...